Instigator / Pro
4
1485
rating
11
debates
63.64%
won
Topic
#4287

Is abortion murder from the point of conception?

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
3
Better sources
2
2
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
1
1

After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...

Sir.Lancelot
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Rated
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
4,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Minimal rating
1,500
Contender / Con
7
1587
rating
182
debates
55.77%
won
Description

This debate will cover all stages of pregnancy but will not cover cases of rape, the removal of ectopic pregnancies, or abortions performed to save the life of the mother. It will also not cover legality. Murder will be defined here in the moral sense. The burden of proof is shared.

-->
@the_viper

“When I made the rule, I didn't assume people would be intentionally annoying. But at this point I don't care, you're just giving me ELO.”
“We'll see how glad you are when this debate is over”

Oh no.
What happened?

-->
@Barney

Viper was recreating the same open challenge, so I just accepted again.

Oh is this a rematch to the other one I read earlier?

-->
@the_viper

No sweat.
Just a momentary setback.

-->
@Sir.Lancelot

Looks like someone got screwed over by the same site rules they were defending
Edit: Wait nvm. RationalMadman is right, this is confusing.

-->
@RationalMadman

Honestly, so did I. Had to bring the two up side-by-side before I realized what was going on.

-->
@whiteflame

I got confused which debate I was voting on, had read a replica of this before and was on phone.

Mindfuck

They have 2 of the same debate what??

-->
@the_viper

He voted for you, ya know?
Not me.

-->
@RationalMadman
@Sir.Lancelot
@the_viper

**************************************************
>Reported Vote: RationalMadman // Mod action: Removed
>Voting Policy: info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy
>Points Awarded: 1 point to Pro (Conduct)
>Reason for Decision:
Con broke a rule and seemed to literally concede. Then Con seems to try to unconcede.
I will give conduct on its own. If this is not allowed, I will give Pro arguments most likely.
>Reason for Mod Action:
The awarding of conduct seems entirely predicated on the breaking of a rule within the debate, though the voter doesn't specify what that rule is and I don't see any rules in the description that were obviously broken.
**************************************************

-->
@Barney
@whiteflame
@Mall
@Nyxified
@Bella3sp

Please vote!

-->
@RationalMadman
@oromagi
@Intelligence_06
@Bones
@Novice_II

Please vote!

Reptile problems.

-->
@Sir.Lancelot

We'll see how glad you are when this debate is over

glad i could help u!
:)

-->
@Sir.Lancelot

When I made the rule, I didn't assume people would be intentionally annoying. But at this point I don't care, you're just giving me ELO.

-->
@the_viper

it's more common than u think.
so long as it's a possibility and i keep accepting your debates in the future, what's to stop me from using that?

-->
@Sir.Lancelot

I think that's a far more unlikely occurrence than someone posting two sentences as an argument.

-->
@the_viper

ok, but i could cite from a source that is completely unrelated to my argument.

And this isn't a personal attack btw because you seem ok, but that part genuinely confuses me.

-->
@Sir.Lancelot

Block text would be evidence and therefore part of your argument

-->
@AustinL0926

No one's debunked it yet

-->
@the_viper

But you yourself admitted you would be fine with a two-sentence argument as long as I cited a quote in block test to meet the character limit.

So that's a contradiction.

-->
@the_viper

That's ironic coming from someone who copy-pastes the same opening argument every time.

-->
@AustinL0926

It's never more convincing, but why should I have to spend time on a debate that the other person clearly isn't putting effort into?

-->
@the_viper

If a two sentence argument is more convincing than a long one, whose fault is that?

-->
@AustinL0926

I find it annoying when people post two sentences as an argument. Sir.Lancelot's posts on this debate are a good example of why I made the rule.

-->
@Sir.Lancelot

"Out of habit"
That's admitting quite a bit

-->
@the_viper

I have little respect for someone who tries to win debates on a rules technicality. Take it or leave it.

-->
@AustinL0926

Imagine simping for someone who deletes their comments every time they lose an argument

-->
@the_viper

Imagine stalking someone so much that you tag them five times.

-->
@Sir.Lancelot

Fair enough

-->
@Sir.Lancelot

We're laughing at you, not with you

-->
@Sir.Lancelot

Because that wasn't obvious already

-->
@Sir.Lancelot

At least I don't whine about the rules of a debate that I agreed to.

-->
@Sir.Lancelot

You'd better not. Crying for help never sends a good message.

-->
@Sir.Lancelot

Did someone mention flame war? I'm in.

-->
@the_viper

Ouch.
Not sure what I did to trigger you.

Do I need to incite another riot in the Comments Section?

-->
@Sir.Lancelot

Next time, quote someone clever

-->
@the_viper

“You have to be somewhat unlikable for me to even consider it.
I don’t even find you annoying.”

-->
@Sir.Lancelot

Someone's afraid to tag me

You have to be somewhat unlikable for me to even consider it.

I don’t even find you annoying.

-->
@Sir.Lancelot

Usually a war would involve someone roasting me back

It's official.
You have never been in a Flame War.

-->
@Sir.Lancelot

That's right, nerd

-->
@the_viper

Flame War- "A lengthy exchange of angry or abusive messages between users of an online forum or other discussion area."

-->
@Sir.Lancelot

I suggest you run while you still can. I have never lost a flame war.

Why did I get tagged 3 times?

Sir.Lancelot has deleted his comments in shame. I weep, for there are no more worlds to conquer.